I like the idea. My first thought was "Why couldn't a Star Destroyer do that?".
But then I realised the point is what it represents.

A ship overhead says "We're here now", but they could leave.
A flying fortress/garrison overhead is an Imperial declaration that says "We're not going anywhere".

I'm going to use one in my game, for certain.

Indeed, plus I think there could be a super fun adventure with the players having to infiltrate a flying fortress garrison to rescue a comrade.

I imagine that because of their flight status, the fortresses would be designed to hold off a ship based attack. I like the idea of an ion shield which causes ion damage to any ship that tries to fly into close proximity._________________RR
________________________________________________________________

Battle for the Golden Sun described the underwater portion of the Aquatic Garrison Base, and could provide a basis for the underside of a Sky-Base. I'd say just use the stats for top portion of the Garrison Base, then tack on a few weapons for defensive and anti-surface purposes, and replace the central sensor tower with a big repulsorlift unit, and vehicle and troop drop-bays instead of TIE launch chutes._________________"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

Strictly speaking, the Hexostar is an EU unit described in the Imperial Handbook that makes an orbiting base from two standard garrisons. And yes, the Navy did object to the Army meddling in their bailiwick. The Adventure Journal issue 12 did have an article about imperial garrisons.

I'd probably suggest a hostile-environment garrison, with an extra glacis level beneath the extra life-support and power generation level.

One cool feature might be extra shield platforms hovering around the garrison itself, reinforcing the shields of the garrison itself (which is mostly using its power to stay aloft). The addition of shield platforms would also make for some interesting objectives if and when some Rebel PCs would want to take out an Imperial Sky Garrison.

I also think that it might make sense to have a dorsal and ventral hull code on the writeup, to represent the glacis level itself. So, I might do something like this:

The IM-X-981b Hostile Environment Garrison - B variant: High Atmospheric Deployment, also known as The Flying Purity, was a variation on a relatively new line of Imperial garrisons specializing in extreme weather conditions and altitudes. Like other Imperial garrisons, it was created by Rothana Heavy Engineering.

A Flying Purity possessed sealed airlocks that were space-rated on all entry points on an extra life-support sub-level. Like the standard Purity-type garrison, it also possessed radiation shielding. Its most spectacular feature, however, was its immence glacis level, providing a thick and somewhat conical platter of sorts beneath the garrison itself.

The Flying Purity was in accordance to the Tarkin Doctrine as a very visible reminder of the Empire's might and power, and was found to be particularly effective on more primitive worlds, allowing the Empire to subjugate an entire planet by simply deploying a Flying Purity from an orbiting Star Destroyer. This freed up needed Navy assets, allowing the Navy to concentrate on finding and destroying enemy space assets rather than being allocated to simple garrisoning duty - usually an Army duty at that.

By virtue of its main mission as an airborne weapons platform, the Flying Purity-type garrison was usually deployed without the standard complement of 200 perimeter support troops, instead usually adding an extra TIE bomber squadron. Its fixed weapons were slightly upgraded because of its mission profile, but it mostly relied on its compliment of TIE fighters and excellent shield strength for aerial defense.

Most Flying Purity-type Imperial Garrisons were also deployed with up to eight extra Garrison Shield Platforms. These lightly armed shield platforms allowed the garrison to dedicate most of its energy output to its immense repulsorlift generators, allowing the ungainly garrison surprising maneuverability.

Strictly speaking, the Hexostar is an EU unit described in the Imperial Handbook that makes an orbiting base from two standard garrisons. And yes, the Navy did object to the Army meddling in their bailiwick. The Adventure Journal issue 12 did have an article about imperial garrisons.

The Hexostar doesn't fit, though. The Orbital Garrison was two garrisons fitted base-to-base, not side to side. I could see the Hexostar as a dedicated space station built by Rothana using garrison base parts, but not as an actual garrison variant.

Quote:

I'd probably suggest a hostile-environment garrison, with an extra glacis level beneath the extra life-support and power generation level.

I'm having difficulty picturing this. There would definitely need to be some sort of under-structure, and the aquatic garrison already demonstrates the precedent for this. Are you saying something like the base-to-base orbital garrison, but with an added layer of vertical wall in the middle to make room for the repulsors and larger reactor?

Quote:

One cool feature might be extra shield platforms hovering around the garrison itself, reinforcing the shields of the garrison itself (which is mostly using its power to stay aloft). The addition of shield platforms would also make for some interesting objectives if and when some Rebel PCs would want to take out an Imperial Sky Garrison.

Just use the Mobile Repulsor Base, minus WEG's maximum altitude stat. Strip out some of the passenger space / research labs on the deck plan and put in a shield generator. Maybe have it be capable of docking with the garrison base at points along the middle...

Quote:

I also think that it might make sense to have a dorsal and ventral hull code on the writeup, to represent the glacis level itself.

I could see this as part of a larger, more detailed stat edit in general, with all ships having different Hull values depending on the fire arc being attacked. With the system we have, though, I'd just stick with one Hull value, maybe reduced from 7D for the stock ground garrison to 6D.

How about IM-R, for Repulsorlift? All the other garrisons have their own distinct model numbers, and it doesn't need to be a variant of the -X-981 to make use of the same technology. I do like the idea of putting the Hostile Environment systems into it, though, as that would facilitate operation at extremely high altitudes or in the atmospheres of gas giants.

Quote:

also known as The Flying Purity.

The Imperial Handbook called them the Peacekeeper series. I don't see any reason to deviate from that.

Quote:

deploying a Flying Purity from an orbiting Star Destroyer.

A minor quibble, but I see this more being towed into orbit by interstellar tug ships (ala the orbital garrison) at which point it can move into the atmosphere under its own power. Assembling a garrison base in orbit over a hostile planet seems overly time consuming and vulnerable. Better to have any ISDs escort the thing into orbit, then let it handle itself from there.

Quote:

By virtue of its main mission as an airborne weapons platform, the Flying Purity-type garrison was usually deployed without the standard complement of 200 perimeter support troops, instead usually adding an extra TIE bomber squadron. Its fixed weapons were slightly upgraded because of its mission profile, but it mostly relied on its complement of TIE fighters and excellent shield strength for aerial defense.

I'd forego adding extra TIEs in favor of adding extra airspeeders, deployed from the underside instead of the TIE bays. There also needs to be a landing bay somewhere large enough to land a shuttle.

It doesn't need to be this fast. Not by a long shot._________________"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

was called "The Purity". It was not a Peacekeeper garrison; the Peacekeeper was specifically the IM-455. A shield projector garrison was a Sharplens, a double-wide orbiting one was a Hexostar, the aquatic one was a Blackfathom.

It is a standard garrison with an extra life support level, and radiation shielding.

The diagram from the Star Wars wiki seems quite sufficient for me to picture how it would look - but with an extra glacis layer beneath, like a layer cake.

The shield platforms are drastically smaller than the garrison itself; therefore, the much smaller crew. I didn't add anything about size there because the original writeup from AJ12 on the standard garrison didn't have any size statted out - I imagine the shield platforms are on the size of, say, 60m in diameter and mostly like a truncated sphere (flat side for landing), and mostly power generation systems.

Personally, I think it is cool if it tops out at ~ 1000 kmh with a full set of shield platforms, and was why I decided to put it there. A primitive planet with mostly airbreathing fighters would be absolutely floored by something deployed while in orbit, making planetfall, and come screaming at speeds that their best fighters would be hard pressed to sustain over long times. I'm fully aware of the TIE fighter's poor performance in atmosphere, comparatively.

The extra TIE bombers is mostly a matter of taste - I just thought the standard garrison squadron of 5 bombers would be insufficient to properly display the Empire's might.

It was not a Peacekeeper garrison; the Peacekeeper was specifically the IM-455. A shield projector garrison was a Sharplens, a double-wide orbiting one was a Hexostar, the aquatic one was a Blackfathom.

It is a standard garrison with an extra life support level, and radiation shielding.

By that standard, it should have its own, separate type name, not a Flying Purity.

And there's nothing in the Imperial Garrisons article in AJ12 to justify the vastly different designs shown in the Imperial Handbook. All variants of the Garrison used the same basic garrison hull, with the aquatic and orbital garrisons simply using a second, upside-down garrison instead of a glacis. The aquatic garrison used the upside-down submerged portion to deploy AT-AT Swimmers and TIE Boats. The only in-universe example of an aquatic garrison (in Battle for the Golden Sun) is pretty clearly a standard Garrison Base equipped with floatation devices and an underwater extension. It's drawn right on the cover.

The one exception I can see using the is the Shield Projector Garrison, but I see that more as part of a Garrison Complex. I do also picture a Starfighter Base variant that sacrifices most of its ground contingent in trade for a lot more fighters (also as part of a Garrison Complex), but that's getting off topic...

Quote:

The shield platforms are drastically smaller than the garrison itself; therefore, the much smaller crew. I didn't add anything about size there because the original writeup from AJ12 on the standard garrison didn't have any size statted out - I imagine the shield platforms are on the size of, say, 60m in diameter and mostly like a truncated sphere (flat side for landing), and mostly power generation systems.

Sutehp did a comparison of a line drawing of a Garrison Base, using an AT-AT in the same picture for scale. If you use the SWTC length of the AT-AT (the WEG one is too short, IMO), it's about 390 meters from point to point.

Quote:

Personally, I think it is cool if it tops out at ~ 1000 kmh with a full set of shield platforms, and was why I decided to put it there. A primitive planet with mostly airbreathing fighters would be absolutely floored by something deployed while in orbit, making planetfall, and come screaming at speeds that their best fighters would be hard pressed to sustain over long times. I'm fully aware of the TIE fighter's poor performance in atmosphere, comparatively.

At this speed, it's outrunning swoops and airspeeders. That's a bit excessive. I picture this thing floating slowly and inexorably through the clouds like a giant murder-zeppelin, which is just as scary and ominous

Quote:

The extra TIE bombers is mostly a matter of taste - I just thought the standard garrison squadron of 5 bombers would be insufficient to properly display the Empire's might.

I always figured a Garrison had a standard Imperial Army Ground Support Wing from the Imperial Sourcebook, but with TIE/gt's instead of bombers. So, two squadrons of TIE/ln's, a squadron of TIE/gt's and a flight of TIE/fc's._________________"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

I could see it having the space 1 speed for while it's being deployed from orbit, then give it something like a 25 km/h airspeed once it reaches orbit.

Then, if the Empire wants to pull out, they'll need a "small" capital ship that can enter orbit and use a tractor beam, or dock with it to tow it out of atmosphere._________________RR
________________________________________________________________

I could see it having the space 1 speed for while it's being deployed from orbit, then give it something like a 25 km/h airspeed once it reaches orbit.

I'm okay with something higher, in the 120-150 km/h range (slightly faster than a real-world zeppelin). If over land, that allows it to serve as a walker-carrier, so it can get relatively close to a target and deploy the walkers to the ground using drop-chutes.

Quote:

Then, if the Empire wants to pull out, they'll need a "small" capital ship that can enter orbit and use a tractor beam, or dock with it to tow it out of atmosphere.

Considering the EU precedent of allowing airspeeders like the LAAT-series to deploy from low orbit without the need for a dropship, I figure allowing this thing to actually go up to low orbit to meet up with the tug ships isn't a problem._________________"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

Also, 120 - 150 kmh is laughably slow. It would be faster to pull a variation of an aerobraking move to make it go faster - go up to the Karman line, angle the glacis slightly, and just cut the repulsorlift or run it at a very low power level; the glacis would act as an airfoil, and you'd do a pretty spectacular reentry maneuver at a forward velocity well in excess of 150 kmh.

Furthermore, 150 kmh wouldn't be a useful speed in order to maneuver the thing around a given world. I'm thinking an Immaculacy garrison would pretty much operate with little other support (except perhaps some kind of warship in orbit - perhaps a corvette or two), and in that case it would have to be able to maneuver with some speed.

Earth's circumference is ~40 000 km. At 150 kmh, you'd spend about 267 hours circumnavigating Earth, or about 11 Standard days - just over 2 Standard weeks. If you're trying to project the Empire's might over an entire planet, using a week getting to the other side of a planet would make a garrison commander way too predictable, the way I see it.

Though I can agree that ~900 kmh is perhaps excessive (a garrison fully equipped with shield platforms), pushing an Immaculacy garrison along at, say, 500 kmh groundspeed (fully equipped) at 75 km altitude sounds fair - and would allow you to get to the other side of a planet a lot faster than one Standard week. Halve the base speed and halve the speed increase from the shield platforms, and you'd still have something that has usable speed.

Now I've got the visual of a more trifoil or teardrop-shaped glacis and a garrison literally falling from space in my head. Though it wouldn't take much of a technical problem to make aerobraking to become lithobraking. And that would likely not impress the natives - one might say that it would fall flat, as it were.

I think something to do with its flight ability would be more appropriate. All the others have names based on the environment in which they operate. Maybe something with "storm" or "thunder" in it...

Personally, I expect I'll just stick with calling it the Peacekeeper, with assorted variants, as Peacekeeper seems appropriately Imperial to suit my tastes.

Quote:

Also, 120 - 150 kmh is laughably slow. It would be faster to pull a variation of an aerobraking move to make it go faster - go up to the Karman line, angle the glacis slightly, and just cut the repulsorlift or run it at a very low power level; the glacis would act as an airfoil, and you'd do a pretty spectacular reentry maneuver at a forward velocity well in excess of 150 kmh.

The thing is, with repulsorlifts and acceleration compensation, this thing could just as easily pop up to loew orbit (above 50 kilometers), use its Space 1 to move rapidly to a new location at that high altitude, and then descend to its destination. Moving from sea level to orbit (or vice versa) under WEG's rules would take ~20 minutes each way.

Alternately, multiple garrisons could be deployed, perhaps with a mix of standard garrisons at strategic locations, with flying garrisons relocating as needed or deployed to inaccessible areas like mountain ranges and the like where ground mobility is much less useful.

Quote:

Now I've got the visual of a more trifoil or teardrop-shaped glacis and a garrison literally falling from space in my head.

When you say glacis, what I'm picturing is an underside unbroken by any sort of structure, which is the opposite of what I'm going for. I see this in its current form as a flying version of the Aquatic Garrison, which features launch bays, weapons and observation stations, which are essential (IMO) for exercising surface control by direct monitoring and the deployment of troops and ground vehicles.

Can you please clarify your meaning for me?_________________"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

I think it would have a powerful psychological effect, as well. In particular, mid-to-low-tech planets would be particularly impressed / cowed by an actual physical thing in the sky. A ship in orbit won't have that same effect. And while a ship could have that effect by simply operating in the lower atmosphere where it can be clearly seen from the ground, it's not the use a ship is designed for. Something like this would be deployed to a planet long-term, and wouldn't need the added expenses of ion drives, hyperdrives, and so on and so forth.

I guess. So just slap a repulosorlift on a existing garrison and boom, sky fortress.

Simple, yet effective. Just have to figure out a max altitude and in atmosphere speed.

OK so how are any garrisons deployed? Reading this thread made me wonder how even normal ground garrisons get placed, so I tried to read up on Wookieepedia.

Imperial Star Destroyers carry one garrison. Garrisons are supposedly dropped by Y-85 Titan dropships. This makes no sense for two reasons.

1. These drops ships only carry 4 AT-ATs, 4 AT-STs and troops. It would take an entire fleet of these to carry one garrison down. And how would they do it? Do they magnetically attach to it?
2. Chris Saxon said that not even one of these could fit on an ISD. He was consulted for the Locations book for the classic trilogy and it was officially stated only smaller carriers could fit in the ISD hanger.

Obviously a garrison doesn't fit in an ISD hanger either, so if it is prefabricated then it must eject from somewhere else in the ISD. I can't see an ISD also carrying a fleet of these dropships that also eject from somewhere else.

I thought that maybe the ISD uses tractor beam tech to place it so that it is not damaged (and does not become a catastrophic meteor for the planet). But these garrisons must be so heavy that it would have to be a powerful tractor beam. If an ISD had tractor beams that powerful, then nothing would ever be able to escape from them.

So I'm thinking it must be that the garrison has its own very powerful repulsorlift to manage a controlled decent. If a repulsorlift is powerful enough to lower a garrison slowly, then it would be powerful enough to also keep it aloft. The only thing a mobile floating fortress garrison would need that a ground one doesn't have would be an extra power source to maintain the level of power needed to keep it aloft.

And even so, I think it would be an incredible waste of power to constantly keep it afloat, so it would make more sense to me that it would be ground garrison that could take off and fly when needed, whether as a psychological factor to spread fear over a different city or it needed to move its resources._________________*
Site MapForum GuidelinesRegistration & Log-In Help

OK so how are any garrisons deployed? Reading this thread made me wonder how even normal ground garrisons get placed, so I tried to read up on Wookieepedia.

I always pictured that the ISD came into high atmosphere, then dropped it out of the main hanger section underneath. After detachment, the Garrison is equipped with some sort of detachable retro-rockets that slow its descent enough to keep it from becoming a planet ending catastrophe, but not enough that no one notices the loud boom and dust cloud created from impact.

But, I always just assumed that it could fit in the main docking section that's big enough to bring in a Corvette.

This way they don't need to find perfectly flat terrain to drop it on, it'll level its own landing site._________________RR
________________________________________________________________

OK so how are any garrisons deployed? Reading this thread made me wonder how even normal ground garrisons get placed, so I tried to read up on Wookieepedia.

Up until the release of RotS, the Theta-Class Landing Barge was the main heavy hauler for ISDs. It was featured in the strategy game Force Commander, and could land a single AT-AT. IIRC, we discussed it in the "Let's Talk Star Destroyers" thread. There were also front-loading barges (the Theta loaded and unloaded from the bottom) in the Incredible Cross-Sections book.

Once RotS came out (and Palpatine's shuttle was ID'd as a Theta), the Theta Landing Barge's status was somewhat in limbo.

My theory is that the much smaller barges seen in ICS can carry either 1 AT-AT or up to 1,000 troops, but can also be configured as bulk cargo transports.

The most likely explanation is that, in the case of a standard Garrison Base, it is broken down into a kit, with all the pieces tightly packed into shipping containers that are sized to fit inside an ISD landing barge. Prefabricated, not pre-assembled.

So, when the decision is made to deploy a Garrison Base, all the base components - as well as the construction equipment needed to assemble it - is loaded onto multiple landing barges and deployed to the construction site. Portions of the garrison (main reactor, waste disposal, and probably subterranean access tunnels to the perimeter defenses) will be below ground level, and will require excavators. Once the base is fully assembled, it is staffed from personnel aboard the ISD. It's likely that the Hostile Environment Garrison would be deployed in similar fashion, although at greater difficulty due to the environmental conditions.

The Aquatic Garrison, however, could be a bit more problematic, although at-sea and underwater construction projects of immense size are accomplished already here on Earth for the petroleum industry. It's possible that it could be constructed on site, possibly with a hexagonal barge serving as both the "foundation" (with the garrison extending both above and below it) and the garrison's primary floatation method. Obviously, there would be no need to excavate, but the components would take up more volume than a standard garrison

The proposed flying garrison might be the outlier, in that it is the most mobile of the garrison types, and could be either assembled in orbit, or in deep space, or at a shipyard somewhere and simply towed to its destination.

Of course, since Rogue One showed that ISD's could operate in a planet's lower atmosphere...

Quote:

I thought that maybe the ISD uses tractor beam tech to place it so that it is not damaged (and does not become a catastrophic meteor for the planet). But these garrisons must be so heavy that it would have to be a powerful tractor beam. If an ISD had tractor beams that powerful, then nothing would ever be able to escape from them.

An ISD could simply fly into the atmosphere and hover over the landing site, using tractor beams to lower the components and construction equipment down to the ground, while simultaneously providing site security during construction. Of the two, I think this version is probably prefered, with the landing barge method used when there is a risk that the ISD will be attacked, and would need to stay in orbit where its mobility is unhampered._________________"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.